Researchers using task-functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) data have access to a wide range of analysis tools to model brain activity. If not accounted for properly, this plethora of analytical approaches can lead to an inflated rate of false positives and contribute to the irreproducibility of neuroimaging findings. Multiverse analyses are a way to systematically explore pipeline variations on a given dataset. We focus on the setting where multiple statistic maps are produced as an output of a set of analyses originating from a single dataset. However, having multiple outputs for the same research question-corresponding to different analytical approaches-makes it especially challenging to draw conclusions and interpret the findings. Meta-analysis is a natural approach to extract consensus inferences from these maps, yet the traditional assumption of independence among input datasets does not hold here. In this work, we consider a suite of methods to conduct meta-analysis in the multiverse setting, which we call same data meta-analysis (SDMA), accounting for inter-pipeline dependence among the results. First, we assessed the validity of these methods in simulations. Then, we tested them on the multiverse outputs of two real-world multiverse analyses: "NARPS", a multiverse study originating from the same dataset analyzed by 70 different teams, and "HCP Young Adult", a more homogeneous multiverse analysis using 24 different pipelines analyzed by the same team. Our findings demonstrate the validity of our proposed SDMA models under inter-pipeline dependence, and provide an array of options, with different levels of relevance, for the analysis of multiverse outputs.